Cain: I wouldn’t be Romney’s VP — but I’d consider being his secretary of defense

posted at 10:02 pm on November 11, 2011 by Allahpundit

Via Mediaite, what do you think? You think the famously cautious Romney would be willing to start his term with a nasty confirmation hearing featuring lots of mud-slinging by Democrats about sexual harassment? You think a President Perry or President Gingrich would be any more eager for that? (Newt seems more inclined towards a John Bolton type, which would present problems of a different sort.) Ironically, Cain’s a better prospect for VP now than he is for a cabinet position precisely because that’s the only path to power left for him that would avoid the need for congressional approval.

Here’s a list of Romney’s foreign policy and national security advisors, incidentally. Chertoff, Hayden, Cofer Black: All respect to Cain for his Navy work, but somehow I don’t see President Mitt installing an establishment outsider atop the defense pyramid when he has a stable like that. Given his economic focus and personal charm, Cain would be better off with an ambassadorship. What about Ubeki-beki-beki-beki-stan-stan? (Yes, I know, ambassadors need to be confirmed too.)

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Comments

Herman Cain is WOEFULLY unqualified for the role of SECDEF. HondaV65 on November 12, 2011 at 9:59 AM

He has an opportunity to make his pitch in the next debate – the next debate is on foreign policy.

After the next debate, I am done watching them. The media will have covered all the major issues by the next debate. The media is going to have to find another way to make ratings out of the republican primary.

I am predicting right here, and now that if “Corporate” America tries to shove Mitt Romney down republican’s throats, the republicans will experience a split in their support. It’s already eroding in Ohio, through over reaching. Ohio is a swing state.

I was watching Monica Crowley sitting in for Sean Hannity last night, and one of the guest was Pat Caddell. He had a very interesting analysis of what’s going on right now with the republican party, and their unwarranted support of Wall Street- defense.

He said it is shaping up as Stupid Party vs Crooked Party. The republicans are covering for Wall Street while Wall Street gives all their money and support to the democrats -that’s stupid.

He makes a good point. For some reason the republican party thinks that Wall Street is the free market but it’s not. If you believe Pat’s analysis, and the republicans are not just as corrupt as the democrats, and want their turn to eat at the corporate troughs. They also mentioned where the TEA party and OWS intersect. Both movements want Wall Street and Corporate influence out of our Government.

Last week Sean Hannity, and other Fox News programs had on Jack Abramoff, he’s out of jail and selling a book. Why would republicans want to remind the voters of why they voted them out of office in larger numbers in 2006? Yeah I can see why Pat Caddell calls the republican party the stupid party in the lead up to the 2012 election, they have Jack Abramoff doing the rounds to hump his book, and remind people why they voted republicans out of office in masses.

There is only one party in the United States, the Property Party…and it has two right wings: Republican and Democrat. Republicans are a bit stupider, more rigid, more doctrinaire in their laissez-faire capitalism than the Democrats, who are cuter, prettier, a bit more corrupt—until recently… and more willing than the Republicans to make small adjustments when the poor, the black, the anti-imperialists get out of hand. But, essentially, there is no difference between the two parties.

Then Cain is a huge flip-flopper. He was a strong Romney supporter in 2008.

swamp_yankee on November 11, 2011 at 10:54 PM

So was I. I was floored when McCain walked away with the nomination but time moves on. What was important in 2008 is no longer what is important today. Obamacare, executive overreach, cronyism… The landscape has changed and Romney no longer fits the bill, for me.

I believe it was the Newt that screwed Herman Cain.I guarantee that history will show it was Newt and old school Republicans that orchestrated this debacle. He has quietly sat back and played mister nice guy during this but he had the most to gain from this. But believe me this guy is old school scum,he is everything we hated about the establishment Republicans. I will never vote for him. Just think about him and his rise here! I’m telling you, Newt Gingrich,
this is the guy!

I also take offense at the implication in your comment that Perry is the Establishment candidate. WTF? Has any other candidate been piled on the way he was? Cain only recently got a taste of pile-on with his SH cases but Perry has been beat on since day 1.

RightMan…I would say Romney from Day One and I think all would agree that he is the one that has been beat up the most on HA!

Romney will be a great POTUS! And despite all the postings to the contrary on here Romney will be a conservative POTUS. Many of you talk about all these flip flops, Romney has not bounced back and forth like you like to say he has…just is not true. There are issues he leaned liberal but then he came to the conservative side and never went back. Voted Pro-life bills as MA Gov. Voted pro-2nd Amendment bills in MA. CUT taxes in blue state MA. Did close tax loopholes JUST LIKE REAGAN and something even our conservative members are talking about today. Is for and ALWAYS has been for the border fence and anti-illegal immigration. Implemented MA laws BEFORE other states did on allowing MA police to question citizenship and turn them over to ICE. For civil unions but has always stated marriage is between a man and woman. Closed a 3 Billion budget gap and LEFT a 2 Billion budget, a FIVE BILLION swing in FOUR years!!! What in here is liberal?

The MA Healthcare, which everyone was “okay” with in the last election, was a STATE LEVEL shortfall he attempted to fix at a STATE level. He has always stated that it was not anything for the rest of the country because that was up those states to figure out what they should do. Heritage helped him craft the bill…liberals ended up changing many parts of it.

Here are Reagan’s words backing up what Romney did and backed by MA constitution calling for mandates written by John Adams:

- State law different from federal law:
Reagan: “The nature of our constitutional system encourages a healthy diversity in the public policies adopted by the people of the several States according to their own conditions, needs, and desires. In the search for enlightened public policy, individual States and communities are free to experiment with a variety of approaches to public issues.” (October 26, 1987) 200 years earlier, James Madison explained the same concept,”The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.” (January 26, 1788)

A list of 66.7% candidates, all pretending to be the 33.3% they are not. Cain would be great on anti-statist solutions for the economy and jobs, but wrong for DOD.

Whoever gets the nomination will be the next POTUS, and they will inherit problems so vast and difficult they will feel enormous pressure like nothing they have ever experienced. We need a strong level-headed anti-statist conservative leader, but have no 100% candidates.

well im as big a cain detractor as anyone on this site. i will never think this guy can make a good president. but a secretary of (fill in the blank) i bet he’d be great. a president cant pick up the phone and call congress and order them to do anything, same w/ the judiciary. thats the kind of control and authority a corporate CEO is used to having. teh board gives him his goals and objectives and then sets the parameters in which he is able to operate. same for a cabinet secretary. the president gives him mission statement and congress passes laws that give the boundaries in which the objectives are to be met. its what he is used to from the corporate world.

I believe it was the Newt that screwed Herman Cain.I guarantee that history will show it was Newt and old school Republicans that orchestrated this debacle. He has quietly sat back and played mister nice guy during this but he had the most to gain from this. But believe me this guy is old school scum,he is everything we hated about the establishment Republicans. I will never vote for him. Just think about him and his rise here! I’m telling you, Newt Gingrich,
this is the guy!

G. on November 12, 2011 at 10:28 AM

Perry, Newt, Romney all had motives to take down Cain. Now why would you be bothered by that? Seriously, why be mad at someone for pointing out an obvious flaw in another candidate. It would be like me being mad that someone brought up Perry’s immigration record. It is an issue that Perry had to address. Unfortunately, or fortunately depending on your point of view, Perry did not have a good answer.

Cain’s SH history, whether you believe it is real or not, was going to come out eventually. We owe a debt of gratitude to whomever tipped off Politico. Now it is up to Cain to put the issue to bed. I don’t think anyone thinks Cain’s team has handled it well. So down in the polls he goes. You might think it is nuts to chose a president based on their ability to tamp down unsubstantiated rumors but crisis response and preparedness is a key presidential skill.

He makes a good point. For some reason the republican party thinks that Wall Street is the free market but it’s not. If you believe Pat’s analysis, and the republicans are not just as corrupt as the democrats, and want their turn to eat at the corporate troughs. They also mentioned where the TEA party and OWS intersect. Both movements want Wall Street and Corporate influence out of our Government.

Dr Evil on November 12, 2011 at 10:23 AM

This is great analysis. I do think the Republicans have caught onto this since most if not all have made it a point to say that they would get the government out of the business of picking winners.

This is great analysis. I do think the Republicans have caught onto this since most if not all have made it a point to say that they would get the government out of the business of picking winners.

Bill C on November 12, 2011 at 11:46 AM

Bill, Mitt Romney is #5 for Wall Street donations. He made a point of meeting with Chase JP Morgan head Jamie Dimon (limousine liberal) who looks to be hedging his bets, he’s one of Barack Obama’s advisers. What that tells me is, Wall Street isn’t sure that Obama can get reelected so they want to back the next best thing just in case (Romney’s history at Bain Capital) makes him a Wall Street insider. (This is why there is a TEA party and OWS, the playing field has been rigged against Average Joe American) None of the candidates are going to repel Wall Street donations. Obama is looking to rake in a One Billion dollars to run for reelection. they can’t turn down any money, that includes Romney. Perry has his own connections to big banks. There is no perfect candidate, but there are some outstanding issues that should give the American electorate pause. Do we or do we not want to take the government back from the financial industry?

Pat Caddell is right it’s stupid to protect Wall Street, when they are donating to the Democrats and voting Democrat. In Ohio a swing state the republicans are already showing their support eroding, this is because of over reaching. This happens when politicians are busy power grabbing and not serving their constituents. The republican establishment can ignore the Will of the People at their own peril. If they sow the wind, they will reap the whirlwind. I honestly think that the establishment republicans think their base is stupid. I have not met any stupid republicans -none, and they are pretty savvy when it comes to politics. The RNC must buy what the media puts on TV:) A few people on cable news does not reflect the vast majority of republican voters. They are usually caricatures, who are booked for ratings purposes in the first place, extreme personalities with extreme point’s of view.

Dr Evil on November 12, 2011 at 12:06 PM
This is why what Palin said in Indianola resonated, at least with me. I don’t know if Cain could resist the lure of big business, but I don’t think Perry or Gingrich could either. Definitely not Romney. Sigh.

You know that’s what makes the closing of that article The Quite Coup” poignant.
If our leadership wakes up to the potential consequences, we may yet see dramatic action on the banking system and a breaking of the old elite. Let us hope it is not then too late.

We are on the path to becoming a banana republic. Barack Obama has stated he refuses to let this country become a banana republic. But look who is funding his campaigns. A politician says one thing and then does another. When he made his remark about not allowing the United States to become a banana republic, it was to defend his position on raising money on the money class through higher taxes – he wouldn’t cut any of the federal government’s bloated budget (spending). An excuse for class warfare, so he just turned his position of stopping the country’s slide into a banana republic, into a billy club to use for his class war fare strategy to get reelected.

a money class fleeces the banking system, while the very trunk of the national tree is permitted to rot and crash. . . .
—Christopher Hitchens

Independents care about “Fiscal Policy Issues” the rest is all just a distraction. If we don’t have a thriving economy and economic stability in this country – bickering about everything else is moot.

When you look at what the media blows up in the news cycle, and it is supposed to be some kind of big deal, you wonder if this is what it was like, when Nero fiddled while Rome burned.

In our case we get to hear what a big deal it is for a politician not to retrieve a word on the tip of his tongue in an allotted time limit in a debate…..yeah that’s what is really significant while our country circles the drain.

The post is accurate, in that Cain did say everything attributed to him. However, he was kind of goaded into making these statements by Michael Savage, who is a self-promoting oaf and was just looking for headlines (see, I did listen to the clip).

As for snark, well, that’s kind of the schtick around here. Where do you all think you are, the WSJ website?

Herman Cain has a broad campaign strategy. All I can say is “Establishment, watch out!” I remember well a successful Jesse Ventura campaign in 1998…. Ventura found an “untapped demographic” which ended up killing the Coleman and Humphrey campaigns.
Cain just might do the same thing.Prediction: Cain is going to win the primary.

Asked whether he would eliminate any departments if he became president, Cain responded, “I wouldn’t approach it that way. … I would do an across-the-board cut of 10 percent of every agency, except for Defense. I would review that to see if we’ve got the right priorities. Then each of my new Cabinet heads, I would then ask them to find another 10 percent by doing a deep dive

Lol, Hondav65 the biggest crybaby on the boards regarding Cain. Telling people to deal with life, Cain is in the lead dude. That’s the reality, he is still in the lead, even after the attempted MSM lynching and displaying that his campaign manager is a loon. Pile on Cain if you want, but remember if your guy takes the lead, he/she will be next!

Lol, Hondav65 the biggest crybaby on the boards regarding Cain. Telling people to deal with life, Cain is in the lead dude. That’s the reality, he is still in the lead, even after the attempted MSM lynching and displaying that his campaign manager is a loon. Pile on Cain if you want, but remember if your guy takes the lead, he/she will be next!

Africanus on November 12, 2011 at 2:44 PM

Yep, he is leading, even though Gingrich is gaining.
And most want to dismiss him.
Mark my words: Jesse Ventura 1998. Cain’s getting on that ticket!

Cain’s SH history, whether you believe it is real or not, was going to come out eventually. We owe a debt of gratitude to whomever tipped off Politico. Now it is up to Cain to put the issue to bed. I don’t think anyone thinks Cain’s team has handled it well. So down in the polls he goes. You might think it is nuts to chose a president based on their ability to tamp down unsubstantiated rumors but crisis response and preparedness is a key presidential skill.

Bill C on November 12, 2011 at 11:44 AM

I see a probably unintentional “straw man” in your argument.

Your assumption is that Cain’s handling of the unproven accusations translates to crisis response and preparedness as president.

I hope Cain is not subjected to repeated personal crises as president. Unless he’s really been some hidden “monster,” then there should be some end to this. It seems more fair and logical to look at Cain’s crisis responses and preparedness as CEO. I’m not sure the current accusations in his personal life are germane.

Everything said about Cain as a CEO says that he’s been a very successful leader.

Unless your qualification for president rides upon the ability to respond to evidence-free, media-amplified personal accusations for 4 or 8 years, Cain might actually be able to replicate his private-sector success.

And if the media were to choose to amplify accusations about President Cain’s personal life without actually obtaining evidence of the crimes committed, as they have done to Cain so far, then they will be actively involved in trying to overthrow the duly-elected president.

If the media were to actually go there with an elected President Cain, then it would finally be time for executive action to take down the MSM for interference with the operation of the office of the presidency, and general sedition for the last several elections.

The First Amendment is not absolute, and at some point some of the biased, corrupt reporters will have to be tried and jailed.

I really do think that Cain would be a better president than Gingrich, because I think Cain has a simpler, more non-academic approach than Gingrich. Cain has vastly greater experience in running business economies.

As Cain’s right-hand man, with a strong vice presidency, Newt would be deadly.

I still believe, after that Gingrich-Cain debate, that that is a winning team, due to the synergy. They would get things done.

I really do think that Cain would be a better president than Gingrich, because I think Cain has a simpler, more non-academic approach than Gingrich. Cain has vastly greater experience in running business economies.

As Cain’s right-hand man, with a strong vice presidency, Newt would be deadly.

I still believe, after that Gingrich-Cain debate, that that is a winning team, due to the synergy. They would get things done.

cane_loader on November 12, 2011 at 4:19 PM

I would support a Cain/Gingrich ticket in a hearbeat.. Cain can temper the somewhat geeky/arrogant Newt.. with a killer Cheif of Staff stuff will get done…

I would support a Cain/Gingrich ticket in a hearbeat.. Cain can temper the somewhat geeky/arrogant Newt.. with a killer Cheif of Staff stuff will get done…

kringeesmom on November 12, 2011 at 5:11 PM

LOL… and so it begins… the writing is on the wall for Cain as he begins his descent.

Recap of Cain’s erstwhile 25% support:

8-10%: Base support (These are the true Cainiacs and will stick with Cain through thick and thin. They will probably stay and go down with the sinking Cain ship).

10-12%: Bitter Palinistas (They hate me for saying it but these are a subset of Palin’s former base support that blame Perry for Palin not running. They remain bitter hence the name. They hate Perry more than they love Cain).

5-8%: Soft support (This swing to whoever is considered to be the “flavor of the week”. They are the first to jump ship/train when a campaign is in trouble).

As you can all see and in line with my prediction last week, Cain has already lost his soft support to Gingrich and is averaging 19%.

I predict he will fall further to about 14% soon as he begins to erode some of the bitter Palinistas who might jump off to Gingrich. Some might see the light and grudgingly join the Perry train.

What Perry has to address with my vote is that, based upon his record, including the Trans-Texas corridor, I believe he will attempt a blanket amnesty and/or huge work-visa program for underskilled Mexicans that will leave underskilled Americans with no access to lower-paying jobs and benefit businesses who wish for an unlimited flood of underskilled Mexican nationals to cut the legs out from underskilled Americans.

We fought this battle with Bush and McCain and I believe Perry will try to shove it down our throats and sell out the hurting undereducated American worker.

Until he can convince me that he will not sell out undereducated American citizens, I do not want him to get the nomination. I don’t like the Texas way of dealing with the flood of illegals.

I believe Gingrich set up Cain the same way George H.W. Bush set up Ross Perot. Establishment Republicans are just as dirty as Democrats and will do anything to stop a change of the way the tax/political system is currently set up. By setting up Cain and leaking blame at Perry or Romney he keeps suspicion off himself as he leapfrogs to the front position all the while posing himself as the brilliant nice guy similar to Cain who used it to climb to the front. The rest he leaves to the Democrat machine and media to go for the kill once blood is in the water.
Cain is an outsider(one of us) just like Ross Perot was with common sense answers to our economical problems. He has other anti establishment ideas for how government should work as did Perot. He also has a proven track record in business just like Ross Perot had. Cain’s only hope is to fight his way back to the top. When/if he does they will go for round two in an attempt to finish him off.

“Africanus on November 12, 2011 at 6:22 AM
If by “my candidate” you mean the last Not-Romney standing when it’s all over, I guess you might have gotten at least one thing right in that childish little screed there.

Suck it up, Stimpy.

Cain’s about as genuine as a Time Square Rolex…

SuperCool on November 12, 2011 at 6:26 PM”

Childish screed beats moronic declaration any day!

Just Suck it, Ren

Cain’s is definately not a genuine politician, that I can agree with!

Will he win, I don’t care! I just disagree with idiots all but declaring campaigns as over. Let them fight it out and hopefully idiot Joe & Mikas choice of Romney or Huntsman will send them into a week long depression. Their tears will bring me happiness!

Also, “Suck it”…yeah, that’s generally the retort of a moron, so, calling someone else’s stuff “moronic”, after telling them to “suck it”…figure you’re either a typical high school kid or an “adult” (sorta) of substandard intelligence.

Let me explain it to you one more time: He’s selling himself as an outsider; a reformer who’s out to challenge the establishment…this overture tends to make him appear to be more than willing to back the establishment pick, so long as it gets him a job in that establishment pick’s prospective administration.

That’s some pretty bad optics right there.

Makes him look like he can be bought for the right price by the very establishment he’s supposedly opposed to.

I won’t even get into his odd choice of cabinet position, considering he’s currently trying to run as a savvy business man, who’s the perfect tonic for our ailing economy, rather than the clear choice if your top issue is national defense.

Sorry SuperCool, you simply came off as a blithering idiot making a statement with no facts to back up your argument. I simply responded in kind and your pathetic attempts at recycling insults tells me your not very quick on your feet!

Poor Optics?

He clearly is an outsider and doesn’t have to sell anyone on that fact. He was asked a question and responded. Your the simple minded dolt who created a whole scenario where Cain could be bought off with a cabinet position when he is the front runner.

Poor Optics!

It was just Mike Savage attempting to be provocative, nothing more!
Cain was simply being honest, he doesn’t like Mitts economic plan and does want to sell it as VP. If he were buyable, he would take Mitts VP slot and sell a plan he doesn’t believe in. You can thank me for destroying your argument later!